>>Ted Simons:
The House unveiled its 2009 budget today. The budget claims to reduce state spending by nearly $1.4 billion and would borrow $500 million for school construction. Joining us to explain the details is the Speaker of the Arizona House of Representative, Jim Weiers. Thanks for joining us.

>>Jim Weiers:
Good evening. How are you doing?

>>Ted Simons:
I'm doing well. When were the final touches put on the budget?

>>Jim Weiers:
Today. We have been working on this particular budget for the last three, four months in consultation with Democrats, governor, Republicans, everybody, we worked this weekend, and we presented the budget as we dropped it, we dropped it already this morning.

>>Ted Simons:
Who was involved in the negotiations and to what extent?

>> Jim Weiers:
I think everybody was involved. Trying to find something that's reasonable, responsible and you have to get the input, so we have been meeting with Democrat counterparts in the majority ever since last December. We had a little bit of an offset when it came to trying to balance out the '08. That took a couple months. Then we went into negotiating with that from this point. Where we're at this point is -- people say is this a Republican budget? It's not, it's an Arizona budget. That's what we're trying to do to maintain responsibility, into the problem that exists, not just the deficit but more importantly make sure we don't cut anything essential to the core principles of Arizona government and the people we serve.

>>Ted Simons:
You mention a Republican budget, there had been some perception and concern and talk that Democratic input was limited at best. Is that a misperception?

>> Jim Weiers:
I think 500 million in bonding would remove that perception. In the beginning, we don't really look at it in terms of Republican and Democrat as much as where we got to go within the specifics as to where we're going to end up. We tried in the very beginning not to add debt because that's why we're where we're at because of the deficit. We have taken a lot of suggestions coming out of the Governor's office and the Democrats, put it into the proposal we presented today. Is it everybody's best budget that they would individually put forward? No, it's a combination of what we've got and ultimately when people see the merits of what we have done I think people will be very pleased with what we've produced.

>>Ted Simons:
In the grand scheme of things as far as suggestions, opinions from the Senate side, how much does that play into what was unveiled today?

>>Jim Weiers:
We were meeting up with the Senate as of Saturday. When you talk about leadership on both sides, Republican and Democrat, the Democrats were represented as to the governor's input every time that we would talk and come up with here's a proposal, counterproposal, they would break and take it back to the governor for input to find out where the executive was on this. So it was a little cumbersome, but something that serious is going to take some time. I don't apologize for the time, especially when we have a product we're very proud of. It's because of the time and thoughtfulness that we put into it- I believe it's now resulted in a very good budget.

>>Ted Simons:
Let's talk about the product. How does the House budget reconcile -- I guess before we get to that, what number are we looking at? 1.9? 2.2?

>>Jim Weiers:
We're looking at 1.9-that's what we have agreed upon. We're looking at a budget you're projecting 370 days out. We don't know what the economy is going to do. Could get worse? It might. But right now the projections we're looking at 1.9.

>>Ted Simons:
Let's talk about how you reconcile that.

>>Jim Weiers:
Sure. The first thing, we wanted to make sure there's five key points that we were looking at and we wanted to ensure. One of the most is that with going into debt are the bonding would not be any more than the reductions looking back in the agencies. It's almost one for one. If you look at the approaches reasonable and responsible had to be the key notes when you look at this. We did not want to make sure that C-P-S was affected when it comes to the safety of our children. K-12, in classroom, nothing has been touched and teacher salaries have not been disturbed, and we're looking at public safety, the prisons and highway parole. These are important to not only Republicans but Democrats and the people of Arizona. Keeping this as a starting point, I'll run through this. We're looking at $505 million in agency reductions, mostly lump sum as was done in the reconciliation of the 2008. Our premise is if you're going to do reductions within agencies, give them back the heads that know best where to do this. For us to start micromanaging here saying cut here, do this, we don't run those agencies. We are part-time legislators at best. Give it to the people are the experts. They have the knowledge where best to make reductions, where it least will hurt the people they serve. 391 million in fund shifts, excess monies projected will not be necessary to go forward within these agencies, these funds, so we're not cutting back into those, we're taking excess money to put back into the general fund. There's $106 million in the highway user fund this. This has been done in the past. It's the only thing constitutionally we can switch back over to the funding of D-P-S, so we have taken 106 on that. $187 million in school count reassessment. This is building new schools. There is now, we have seen over the last six, seven months, a decrease in the need for building schools. What was expected to be 4 or 5 or 6\% within growth is down to 2.5\%. If we don't need the buildings we say put a temporary stop to the building of the schools. It's not a moratorium because we are still building the schools as identified. But both the governor's office and us have agreed that 187 million could be put on hold at this point that we don't have to build.

>>Ted Simons:
Let's go through one by one starting with agency cuts.

>>Jim Weiers:
You bet.

>>Ted Simons:
I know you say it's a lump sum. For folks watching, who work in agencies, how do they know if their agency is going to be affected? Can it be narrowed in any way, shape or form or is it just a lump sum?

>>Jim Weiers:
The lump sum is back to the agencies. You would take agency a, you would say, $5 to agency a, then agency b, you say $10 to agency b. Agency c may have $2. The larger the agencies are as to the components as to what they've contributed to the spending, the more money. As a percentage, there wasn't a whole lot of the agencies that we went more than 5, 6, 7\% total cuts back into those. Giving those agencies the ability to move money around as to policy decisions, we did the same thing in 2008. We have talked to people and even as business, if I run a business, give me the opportunity to make the decisions better than somebody that's an outside consultant saying, get rid of somebody, remove this person, move this person over there. Consolidate. Let them make the assessments where it will have the least harm within those agencies.

>>Ted Simons:
At this point you can't say how many or which jobs might be at stake?

>>Jim Weiers:
I don't know if there will be any jobs at stake. It depends how well they do their job and where they can find the excess within government. If you're looking at 5 or 6\% as a reduction, that's not a whole lot when you look at what the cities and counties, businesses are doing. We don't think we're asking too much. The bigger question is would you say there's any agency out there that is not running more than 5\% where they can come back and find waste? Not saying fraud, but waste where they can do a better job as a reassessment of what they're doing, we think that they can.

>>Ted Simons:
Okay. Would you talk --I seem to remember an 800 or 850 number thrown around earlier. Was that something leadership was looking at and you you've gone down to 500 million?

>>Jim Weiers:
Right.

>>Ted Simons:
It's good by you?

>>Jim Weiers:
It's good by us. As we go through the package we'll explain it. Some of the agency reductions, talking about the 505. The 391, these are the fund shifts as we have identified where there are excess monies up above what those agencies or funds need. If you have a fund that has $400,000 in it and we can show it can operate for $350,000, then we want that $50,000 that's not going to be necessary to be able to go through.

>>Ted Simons:
How specific is that?

>>Jim Weiers:
Very specific. Those go right back into the shifts and identifies the shifts by the names, categories, agencies and departments.

>>Ted Simons:
How many agencies are affected?

>>Jim Weiers:
I don't have that number. I would imagine 40 or 50.

>>Ted Simons:
Okay. You also mentioned the picking up litter fund.

>>Ted Simons:
Talk about this. This $106 million that would have cleaned up the roadway goes to--

>>Jim Weiers:
Back to the Highway Patrol Fund. Highway patrol will either be funded out of the general fund -- the Constitution allows one deviation as to how that's funded, and to the H-U-R-F User Fund. This is one area that says you can use that. We have done it throughout the years. This is one of those years we think we need to do its as to how that money could have been used, we think it's more important to fund the highway patrol and use that excess money again to be able to safeguard, making sure C-P-S. is not affected and that we don't get into the classrooms. Public safety as a whole is not going to be cut back.

>>Ted Simons:
You talked about classroom - the school count reassessment. Are there cuts that affect school districts?

>>Jim Weiers:
I don't believe that there are. We concentrated more than anything else on the actual classroom itself. If you're looking to soft capital, no. If you're looking at teachers' pay, no. If you're looking at redeployment on the A-D-M, no. The only thing that stands out is reassessment of school buildings that we have determined at this point is not necessary. That's been agreed to by the governor's office too as I understand it. So we both agree that there's about $187 million out of about 300-320 million that's going to be built. So it's not necessarily moratorium. Schools are still going to be built but they are in fast-growing districts. Districts that now are slowing down and don't need those schools will put that off. We don't have to start.

>>Ted Simons:
Let get to the borrowing, $500 million for building construction. A lot of folks were against this, vehemently so. Hard to swallow?

>>Jim Weiers:
It's not hard to swallow. For the last three years there's been an incredible attempt to bond for schools. This is in times when we're growing at 19\% in growth. We were able to fend that off. Now, the irony is if we had taken the bonding when it was being pushed down our throats and we were successfully able to fend off we wouldn't even have that option today. If you're looking at reductions some people will say why you have to reduce government that would be up to the 500 million even more so than it is now. We were able to pay for cash at the time when we were flush with cash. The reason we're in a deficit today, quite simply, is couple years ago we had about $2 billion of excess revenue that came into the state, the majority came from the housing element of society. These were capital gains. I continually told people this is a one-time shot. This will not repeat itself. But that's what experience tells you. That's not something that goes over well with people who want to spend money. I have learned a couple things, that every cent will always be spent. Never a nickel left on the table when you leave. Doing that, the best that we could do is a lot of things, fully fund back on the B-S-F, which is rainy day, which again, it was good that we did. Not only did we do it but we did it to the extremes we possibly could and we will use every dime of it.

>>Ted Simons:
Real quickly Rainy Day fund completely drained?

>>Jim Weiers: Eventually drained off. We started with about $700 million. I think it was 698 million. There were attempts in years past not only not to fund it but even to spend it. I think that we made the right decisions then. I think we're making the right decisions now. If you get into the H-U-R-F, that's nothing but a transfer in the highway user fund that allows to us use $106 million to help balance out the deficit.

>>Ted Simons:
Are you going to be able to get those very vocal against the idea of bonding or borrowing, are you going to be able to get those folks to go ahead with this?

>>Jim Weiers:
As I have seen what's proposed at this point, and it's not out yet, but as I understand the alternative plan there's over $1 billion in borrowing. When you start looking at what we're proposing that becomes a little more palatable. Sometimes the best you can do is show comparisons of what one is and what you're proposing. We're quite moderate at this point.

>>Ted Simons:
I notice revenue sharing is included as well. How is that going to impact cities?

>>Jim Weiers:
It's not. I made a promise a long time ago that revenue sharing would be off the table until we came to at least same position as the cities and counties have gotten. If you look at the changes they have made within the way they do business, they are rearranging, riffing, laying off, reassessing the way they do business and we at the state still haven't got to that point. Until we actually get to the seriousness of actually reducing the cost of government like the counties and cities have we shouldn't penalize them and try to balance the budget on the backs of the counties and cities. We still haven't gotten to the point where the cities have. The cities are hurting bad and I'm not going to touch it. There's about $18 million which has nothing to do with the formula. Just before I got here an email was sent by the League of Cities that says we're happy with what we got. As long as you don't touch the funding we're very happy.

>>Ted Simons:
When you see revenue sharing involved in the budget and cities are happy, that's interesting.

>>Jim Weiers:
That's the league. They represent the city. I gave my word a long time ago, I said until we get serious as the cities and counties are we have no right to ask for them to give up anything. We still have not got to that seriousness point yet.

>>Ted Simons:
Can this budget make it out of the house?

>>Jim Weiers:
I hope so. The problem when you introduce any piece of legislation, you don't enter a piece of legislation with the guarantees that anything will pass. A budget is nothing more than just a bill. You start with the concept of this is where we're at. I don't care if it's this bill or if it was a bill on license plates. When you start a piece of legislation, you drop the legislation, you go out and start talking about why the legislation works. I believe I can say this does exactly what we need to do. It comes back in and settles this issue, the 1.9 billion on the deficit. We don't touch kids. We don't touch K-12, we leave public safety. There's going to be some reduction. People say 5\%, 6\% over all is too much reduction. Then I think there's a reality check they need to look at. Go out and really look at life. With businesses and families out there making reassessments about how they are doing there's things you start looking at. Can we do business in a different way to reduce money? We're asking everybody to chip in. If everybody does, we'll get there.

>>Ted Simons:
Biggest challenge you think you'll get regarding this budget in the Senate.

>>Jim Weiers:
I don't know. I believe what we're presenting at this point is extremely reasonable. I think it's very, very responsible. There's going to be elements within this that people will take exception to. With any piece of legislation. However, coming back in and facts alone, as they are, without being spun, just telling it, this is why we're doing this and this is how we're doing that, it's very hard in my opinion for anybody to say this is not the best that we could possibly get.

>>Ted Simons:
Governor's office included. Biggest challenge you see as far as executive.

>>Jim Weiers: The governor is the governor. We have had a difference of opinion on different issues. We also had a difference of opinion when it came to bonding in the last two, three years. The governor did acquiesce to the fact that we didn't do it and I'm glad she did. Otherwise we would be in a heck of a mess, more so than now. We had a disagreement when the governor wanted to spend more money out of the Rainy Day Fund and not fund it. Acquiesced again and I'm glad she did it. In this case when the governor sees it, and I hope she sees it, I can't zee see anything in here the governor would find objectionable.

>>Ted Simons:
House Speaker Jim Weiers, thanks for joining us.

>>Jim Weiers:
Are we done?

>>Ted Simons:
We're done. Thank you.

>>>Ted Simons:
Tonight we begin a four-part series about things you might be surprised are made in Arizona. Or things that are unique to our state. In our first part, the latter applies. The Paolo Soleri Wind Bells are known around the world. They are produced at the experimental living facility, Arcosanti, north of Phoenix, and at Cosanti in Paradise Valley. The unique look and sounds of the Soleri bells have become a part of the Arizona mystique. Producer Larry Lemmons and Videographer David Riffle take us to Paradise Valley to see how the bells are made.

>>Paolo Soleri:
We always were immersed in sounds, sound of environment, sound exchange between people, people and animals, between people and volcano and ocean. We are monologuing constantly. I don't even know if we can think if we are not talking to ourselves.

Larry Lemmons:
Paolo Soleri has been having a conversation with nature for almost a century. His early association with Frank Lloyd Wright is evident here at Cosanti in Paradise Valley and farther north at Arcosanti--communities that seem to rise out of the earth itself. But there is a particular Soleri language that was born in the desert and has spread with the wind across the world.

>>Mary Hodely:
The wind in the desert, yeah, for me it's turning, you know, plows shares into aesthetic pieces. Turning bullets into something aesthetic and beautiful. Paolo probably never would have chosen bells as his bread and butter, but he fell into doing bells and there's been great support for his work.

>>Larry Lemmons:
Molten bronze, the material used for the Soleri Windbells. He began with ceramic bells but evolved into bronze. This foundry at Cosanti, they are making bells of their own design.

>>Mary Hodely: We're taking the foundry sand that we use over and over again. It looks black now but we started with green sand. They pack the foundry sand in beautiful wooden molding flasks that can come apart in two directions both horizontally and kind of vertically. They pack that sand around in aluminum pattern plates. They use these archaic 19th century squeezers with hydraulic pressure that gives extra pressure to squeeze them in place. They take the molds off the pattern plate and have it in two pieces. They can impress designs into the cone-shaped part of the mold. Afterward designs have been impressed into that sand, into the female part of the mold, put that together, they make the hole they call the screw for the hot bronze to get into the bell part of the mold. So they place the sand mold on the ground, take away the wooden molding flask and add a metal jacket. Then they heat up a propane furnace up to 2200 degrees. So it's got a beautiful orange glow. They do that--so when the bronze is poured and we use-- 8,000-year-old technique of heating up bronze and pouring it into the mold and we don't have conveyor belts, we lift the crucible out of the furnace and pour it into the mold. Each of our molders makes about two to five molds in the morning before our first pour so that we can have enough mold space to accommodate the 100 pounds of bronze in the first crucible. Of course, you have the helpers ready with shovels and they used the shovel to shield the hands of people pouring the bronze from the heat coming off the already poured mold.

>>Larry Lemmons:
Soleri himself carves designs into Styrofoam which are then molded in bronze and are constructed with bells that are signed by the artists. They are part of what's called special assemblies. In this way, the aesthetic whole is truly much more than the sum of its parts.

>>Paolo Soleri:
This elemental combination of shape, form and sound is a very, very old tradition. Mankind tries to make sound one way or another.

>>Mary Hodely:
When the Scottsdale Convention Bureau or Arizona office of tourism is going on an international travel junket to drum up tourism they often take Soleri bells as a gift of choice. It's not a cactus or a cowboy boot. But it's definitely made in Arizona, signature to this area. Paolo Soleri is world-renowned and the bells are world-renowned. Paolo would hope he's not just known as a bell-maker, but that's often what people say, oh, Paolo Soleri, the bell-maker.

>>Ted Simons:
Tomorrow on "Horizon" we continue our series made in Arizona with a trip up north to strawberry for some fresh goat milk fudge and fresh goat cheese at the fossil creek creamery. That's Tuesday at 7:00 on "Horizon." that's it for now. I'm Ted Simons. Thank you for joining us. You have a great evening.

>>Ted Simons:
The House unveiled its 2009 budget today. The budget claims to reduce state spending by nearly $1.4 billion and would borrow $500 million for school construction. Joining us to explain the details is the Speaker of the Arizona House of Representative, Jim Weiers. Thanks for joining us.

>>Jim Weiers:
Good evening. How are you doing?

>>Ted Simons:
I'm doing well. When were the final touches put on the budget?

>>Jim Weiers:
Today. We have been working on this particular budget for the last three, four months in consultation with Democrats, governor, Republicans, everybody, we worked this weekend, and we presented the budget as we dropped it, we dropped it already this morning.

>>Ted Simons:
Who was involved in the negotiations and to what extent?

>> Jim Weiers:
I think everybody was involved. Trying to find something that's reasonable, responsible and you have to get the input, so we have been meeting with Democrat counterparts in the majority ever since last December. We had a little bit of an offset when it came to trying to balance out the '08. That took a couple months. Then we went into negotiating with that from this point. Where we're at this point is -- people say is this a Republican budget? It's not, it's an Arizona budget. That's what we're trying to do to maintain responsibility, into the problem that exists, not just the deficit but more importantly make sure we don't cut anything essential to the core principles of Arizona government and the people we serve.

>>Ted Simons:
You mention a Republican budget, there had been some perception and concern and talk that Democratic input was limited at best. Is that a misperception?

>> Jim Weiers:
I think 500 million in bonding would remove that perception. In the beginning, we don't really look at it in terms of Republican and Democrat as much as where we got to go within the specifics as to where we're going to end up. We tried in the very beginning not to add debt because that's why we're where we're at because of the deficit. We have taken a lot of suggestions coming out of the Governor's office and the Democrats, put it into the proposal we presented today. Is it everybody's best budget that they would individually put forward? No, it's a combination of what we've got and ultimately when people see the merits of what we have done I think people will be very pleased with what we've produced.

>>Ted Simons:
In the grand scheme of things as far as suggestions, opinions from the Senate side, how much does that play into what was unveiled today?

>>Jim Weiers:
We were meeting up with the Senate as of Saturday. When you talk about leadership on both sides, Republican and Democrat, the Democrats were represented as to the governor's input every time that we would talk and come up with here's a proposal, counterproposal, they would break and take it back to the governor for input to find out where the executive was on this. So it was a little cumbersome, but something that serious is going to take some time. I don't apologize for the time, especially when we have a product we're very proud of. It's because of the time and thoughtfulness that we put into it- I believe it's now resulted in a very good budget.

>>Ted Simons:
Let's talk about the product. How does the House budget reconcile -- I guess before we get to that, what number are we looking at? 1.9? 2.2?

>>Jim Weiers:
We're looking at 1.9-that's what we have agreed upon. We're looking at a budget you're projecting 370 days out. We don't know what the economy is going to do. Could get worse? It might. But right now the projections we're looking at 1.9.

>>Ted Simons:
Let's talk about how you reconcile that.

>>Jim Weiers:
Sure. The first thing, we wanted to make sure there's five key points that we were looking at and we wanted to ensure. One of the most is that with going into debt are the bonding would not be any more than the reductions looking back in the agencies. It's almost one for one. If you look at the approaches reasonable and responsible had to be the key notes when you look at this. We did not want to make sure that C-P-S was affected when it comes to the safety of our children. K-12, in classroom, nothing has been touched and teacher salaries have not been disturbed, and we're looking at public safety, the prisons and highway parole. These are important to not only Republicans but Democrats and the people of Arizona. Keeping this as a starting point, I'll run through this. We're looking at $505 million in agency reductions, mostly lump sum as was done in the reconciliation of the 2008. Our premise is if you're going to do reductions within agencies, give them back the heads that know best where to do this. For us to start micromanaging here saying cut here, do this, we don't run those agencies. We are part-time legislators at best. Give it to the people are the experts. They have the knowledge where best to make reductions, where it least will hurt the people they serve. 391 million in fund shifts, excess monies projected will not be necessary to go forward within these agencies, these funds, so we're not cutting back into those, we're taking excess money to put back into the general fund. There's $106 million in the highway user fund this. This has been done in the past. It's the only thing constitutionally we can switch back over to the funding of D-P-S, so we have taken 106 on that. $187 million in school count reassessment. This is building new schools. There is now, we have seen over the last six, seven months, a decrease in the need for building schools. What was expected to be 4 or 5 or 6\% within growth is down to 2.5\%. If we don't need the buildings we say put a temporary stop to the building of the schools. It's not a moratorium because we are still building the schools as identified. But both the governor's office and us have agreed that 187 million could be put on hold at this point that we don't have to build.

>>Ted Simons:
Let's go through one by one starting with agency cuts.

>>Jim Weiers:
You bet.

>>Ted Simons:
I know you say it's a lump sum. For folks watching, who work in agencies, how do they know if their agency is going to be affected? Can it be narrowed in any way, shape or form or is it just a lump sum?

>>Jim Weiers:
The lump sum is back to the agencies. You would take agency a, you would say, $5 to agency a, then agency b, you say $10 to agency b. Agency c may have $2. The larger the agencies are as to the components as to what they've contributed to the spending, the more money. As a percentage, there wasn't a whole lot of the agencies that we went more than 5, 6, 7\% total cuts back into those. Giving those agencies the ability to move money around as to policy decisions, we did the same thing in 2008. We have talked to people and even as business, if I run a business, give me the opportunity to make the decisions better than somebody that's an outside consultant saying, get rid of somebody, remove this person, move this person over there. Consolidate. Let them make the assessments where it will have the least harm within those agencies.

>>Ted Simons:
At this point you can't say how many or which jobs might be at stake?

>>Jim Weiers:
I don't know if there will be any jobs at stake. It depends how well they do their job and where they can find the excess within government. If you're looking at 5 or 6\% as a reduction, that's not a whole lot when you look at what the cities and counties, businesses are doing. We don't think we're asking too much. The bigger question is would you say there's any agency out there that is not running more than 5\% where they can come back and find waste? Not saying fraud, but waste where they can do a better job as a reassessment of what they're doing, we think that they can.

>>Ted Simons:
Okay. Would you talk --I seem to remember an 800 or 850 number thrown around earlier. Was that something leadership was looking at and you you've gone down to 500 million?

>>Jim Weiers:
Right.

>>Ted Simons:
It's good by you?

>>Jim Weiers:
It's good by us. As we go through the package we'll explain it. Some of the agency reductions, talking about the 505. The 391, these are the fund shifts as we have identified where there are excess monies up above what those agencies or funds need. If you have a fund that has $400,000 in it and we can show it can operate for $350,000, then we want that $50,000 that's not going to be necessary to be able to go through.

>>Ted Simons:
How specific is that?

>>Jim Weiers:
Very specific. Those go right back into the shifts and identifies the shifts by the names, categories, agencies and departments.

>>Ted Simons:
How many agencies are affected?

>>Jim Weiers:
I don't have that number. I would imagine 40 or 50.

>>Ted Simons:
Okay. You also mentioned the picking up litter fund.

>>Ted Simons:
Talk about this. This $106 million that would have cleaned up the roadway goes to--

>>Jim Weiers:
Back to the Highway Patrol Fund. Highway patrol will either be funded out of the general fund -- the Constitution allows one deviation as to how that's funded, and to the H-U-R-F User Fund. This is one area that says you can use that. We have done it throughout the years. This is one of those years we think we need to do its as to how that money could have been used, we think it's more important to fund the highway patrol and use that excess money again to be able to safeguard, making sure C-P-S. is not affected and that we don't get into the classrooms. Public safety as a whole is not going to be cut back.

>>Ted Simons:
You talked about classroom - the school count reassessment. Are there cuts that affect school districts?

>>Jim Weiers:
I don't believe that there are. We concentrated more than anything else on the actual classroom itself. If you're looking to soft capital, no. If you're looking at teachers' pay, no. If you're looking at redeployment on the A-D-M, no. The only thing that stands out is reassessment of school buildings that we have determined at this point is not necessary. That's been agreed to by the governor's office too as I understand it. So we both agree that there's about $187 million out of about 300-320 million that's going to be built. So it's not necessarily moratorium. Schools are still going to be built but they are in fast-growing districts. Districts that now are slowing down and don't need those schools will put that off. We don't have to start.

>>Ted Simons:
Let get to the borrowing, $500 million for building construction. A lot of folks were against this, vehemently so. Hard to swallow?

>>Jim Weiers:
It's not hard to swallow. For the last three years there's been an incredible attempt to bond for schools. This is in times when we're growing at 19\% in growth. We were able to fend that off. Now, the irony is if we had taken the bonding when it was being pushed down our throats and we were successfully able to fend off we wouldn't even have that option today. If you're looking at reductions some people will say why you have to reduce government that would be up to the 500 million even more so than it is now. We were able to pay for cash at the time when we were flush with cash. The reason we're in a deficit today, quite simply, is couple years ago we had about $2 billion of excess revenue that came into the state, the majority came from the housing element of society. These were capital gains. I continually told people this is a one-time shot. This will not repeat itself. But that's what experience tells you. That's not something that goes over well with people who want to spend money. I have learned a couple things, that every cent will always be spent. Never a nickel left on the table when you leave. Doing that, the best that we could do is a lot of things, fully fund back on the B-S-F, which is rainy day, which again, it was good that we did. Not only did we do it but we did it to the extremes we possibly could and we will use every dime of it.

>>Ted Simons:
Real quickly Rainy Day fund completely drained?

>>Jim Weiers: Eventually drained off. We started with about $700 million. I think it was 698 million. There were attempts in years past not only not to fund it but even to spend it. I think that we made the right decisions then. I think we're making the right decisions now. If you get into the H-U-R-F, that's nothing but a transfer in the highway user fund that allows to us use $106 million to help balance out the deficit.

>>Ted Simons:
Are you going to be able to get those very vocal against the idea of bonding or borrowing, are you going to be able to get those folks to go ahead with this?

>>Jim Weiers:
As I have seen what's proposed at this point, and it's not out yet, but as I understand the alternative plan there's over $1 billion in borrowing. When you start looking at what we're proposing that becomes a little more palatable. Sometimes the best you can do is show comparisons of what one is and what you're proposing. We're quite moderate at this point.

>>Ted Simons:
I notice revenue sharing is included as well. How is that going to impact cities?

>>Jim Weiers:
It's not. I made a promise a long time ago that revenue sharing would be off the table until we came to at least same position as the cities and counties have gotten. If you look at the changes they have made within the way they do business, they are rearranging, riffing, laying off, reassessing the way they do business and we at the state still haven't got to that point. Until we actually get to the seriousness of actually reducing the cost of government like the counties and cities have we shouldn't penalize them and try to balance the budget on the backs of the counties and cities. We still haven't gotten to the point where the cities have. The cities are hurting bad and I'm not going to touch it. There's about $18 million which has nothing to do with the formula. Just before I got here an email was sent by the League of Cities that says we're happy with what we got. As long as you don't touch the funding we're very happy.

>>Ted Simons:
When you see revenue sharing involved in the budget and cities are happy, that's interesting.

>>Jim Weiers:
That's the league. They represent the city. I gave my word a long time ago, I said until we get serious as the cities and counties are we have no right to ask for them to give up anything. We still have not got to that seriousness point yet.

>>Ted Simons:
Can this budget make it out of the house?

>>Jim Weiers:
I hope so. The problem when you introduce any piece of legislation, you don't enter a piece of legislation with the guarantees that anything will pass. A budget is nothing more than just a bill. You start with the concept of this is where we're at. I don't care if it's this bill or if it was a bill on license plates. When you start a piece of legislation, you drop the legislation, you go out and start talking about why the legislation works. I believe I can say this does exactly what we need to do. It comes back in and settles this issue, the 1.9 billion on the deficit. We don't touch kids. We don't touch K-12, we leave public safety. There's going to be some reduction. People say 5\%, 6\% over all is too much reduction. Then I think there's a reality check they need to look at. Go out and really look at life. With businesses and families out there making reassessments about how they are doing there's things you start looking at. Can we do business in a different way to reduce money? We're asking everybody to chip in. If everybody does, we'll get there.

>>Ted Simons:
Biggest challenge you think you'll get regarding this budget in the Senate.

>>Jim Weiers:
I don't know. I believe what we're presenting at this point is extremely reasonable. I think it's very, very responsible. There's going to be elements within this that people will take exception to. With any piece of legislation. However, coming back in and facts alone, as they are, without being spun, just telling it, this is why we're doing this and this is how we're doing that, it's very hard in my opinion for anybody to say this is not the best that we could possibly get.

>>Ted Simons:
Governor's office included. Biggest challenge you see as far as executive.

>>Jim Weiers: The governor is the governor. We have had a difference of opinion on different issues. We also had a difference of opinion when it came to bonding in the last two, three years. The governor did acquiesce to the fact that we didn't do it and I'm glad she did. Otherwise we would be in a heck of a mess, more so than now. We had a disagreement when the governor wanted to spend more money out of the Rainy Day Fund and not fund it. Acquiesced again and I'm glad she did it. In this case when the governor sees it, and I hope she sees it, I can't zee see anything in here the governor would find objectionable.

>>Ted Simons:
House Speaker Jim Weiers, thanks for joining us.

>>Jim Weiers:
Are we done?

>>Ted Simons:
We're done. Thank you.

>>>Ted Simons:
Tonight we begin a four-part series about things you might be surprised are made in Arizona. Or things that are unique to our state. In our first part, the latter applies. The Paolo Soleri Wind Bells are known around the world. They are produced at the experimental living facility, Arcosanti, north of Phoenix, and at Cosanti in Paradise Valley. The unique look and sounds of the Soleri bells have become a part of the Arizona mystique. Producer Larry Lemmons and Videographer David Riffle take us to Paradise Valley to see how the bells are made.

>>Paolo Soleri:
We always were immersed in sounds, sound of environment, sound exchange between people, people and animals, between people and volcano and ocean. We are monologuing constantly. I don't even know if we can think if we are not talking to ourselves.

Larry Lemmons:
Paolo Soleri has been having a conversation with nature for almost a century. His early association with Frank Lloyd Wright is evident here at Cosanti in Paradise Valley and farther north at Arcosanti--communities that seem to rise out of the earth itself. But there is a particular Soleri language that was born in the desert and has spread with the wind across the world.

>>Mary Hodely:
The wind in the desert, yeah, for me it's turning, you know, plows shares into aesthetic pieces. Turning bullets into something aesthetic and beautiful. Paolo probably never would have chosen bells as his bread and butter, but he fell into doing bells and there's been great support for his work.

>>Larry Lemmons:
Molten bronze, the material used for the Soleri Windbells. He began with ceramic bells but evolved into bronze. This foundry at Cosanti, they are making bells of their own design.

>>Mary Hodely: We're taking the foundry sand that we use over and over again. It looks black now but we started with green sand. They pack the foundry sand in beautiful wooden molding flasks that can come apart in two directions both horizontally and kind of vertically. They pack that sand around in aluminum pattern plates. They use these archaic 19th century squeezers with hydraulic pressure that gives extra pressure to squeeze them in place. They take the molds off the pattern plate and have it in two pieces. They can impress designs into the cone-shaped part of the mold. Afterward designs have been impressed into that sand, into the female part of the mold, put that together, they make the hole they call the screw for the hot bronze to get into the bell part of the mold. So they place the sand mold on the ground, take away the wooden molding flask and add a metal jacket. Then they heat up a propane furnace up to 2200 degrees. So it's got a beautiful orange glow. They do that--so when the bronze is poured and we use-- 8,000-year-old technique of heating up bronze and pouring it into the mold and we don't have conveyor belts, we lift the crucible out of the furnace and pour it into the mold. Each of our molders makes about two to five molds in the morning before our first pour so that we can have enough mold space to accommodate the 100 pounds of bronze in the first crucible. Of course, you have the helpers ready with shovels and they used the shovel to shield the hands of people pouring the bronze from the heat coming off the already poured mold.

>>Larry Lemmons:
Soleri himself carves designs into Styrofoam which are then molded in bronze and are constructed with bells that are signed by the artists. They are part of what's called special assemblies. In this way, the aesthetic whole is truly much more than the sum of its parts.

>>Paolo Soleri:
This elemental combination of shape, form and sound is a very, very old tradition. Mankind tries to make sound one way or another.

>>Mary Hodely:
When the Scottsdale Convention Bureau or Arizona office of tourism is going on an international travel junket to drum up tourism they often take Soleri bells as a gift of choice. It's not a cactus or a cowboy boot. But it's definitely made in Arizona, signature to this area. Paolo Soleri is world-renowned and the bells are world-renowned. Paolo would hope he's not just known as a bell-maker, but that's often what people say, oh, Paolo Soleri, the bell-maker.

>>Ted Simons:
Tomorrow on "Horizon" we continue our series made in Arizona with a trip up north to strawberry for some fresh goat milk fudge and fresh goat cheese at the fossil creek creamery. That's Tuesday at 7:00 on "Horizon." that's it for now. I'm Ted Simons. Thank you for joining us. You have a great evening.